Analysis of Exosome Therapeutics market Strategies and Forecasts to 2035

The “Exosome Therapeutics Market, 2022-2040” report features an extensive study on the current market landscape, offering an informed opinion on the likely evolution of the exosome therapies in the treatment of various diseases.

Key Inclusions
 General introduction to exosomes, types of extracellular vesicles and their origin, secretion, and type of membrane. In addition, it provides information on the development process of exosomes and details on applications of exosomes, mechanism of different therapies, along with the advantages, risks associated with exosome therapeutics and the future perspectives.
 A detailed assessment of the current market landscape of exosome therapeutics, based on several relevant parameters, such as phase of development (clinical and preclinical), technology platform (DeliverEXTM platform, iPSC Platform, engEx™ Platform, mTEV Platform, PEP Exosome Technology and others), type of payload (protein, biologics, RNA, vaccine, antisense oligonucleotide, DNA / protein and AAV capsids), target disease indication (s) (COVID-19, acute respiratory distress syndrome, skin regeneration, cancer and others), therapeutic area (oncological disorders, dermatological disorders, neurological disorders, infectious diseases, rare disorders, autoimmune disorders and respiratory disorders and others), biological target, route of administration (intravenous, oral, subcutaneous, intratumoral, nasal and others), type of therapy (monotherapy and combination therapy), combination drug, line of treatment and dosing frequency. In addition, it provides details on the companies engaged in the development of exosome therapeutics, along with information on their year of establishment, company size and location of headquarters.
 Elaborate profiles of the key players engaged in the development of exosome therapeutics, with maximum number of therapeutic programs in their pipeline. Each profile features a brief overview of the company, its financial information (if available), details on its product portfolio and a section on recent developments and an informed future outlook.
 Elaborate drug profiles of the key therapeutics . Each profile features a brief information on product portfolio and clinical trial information including study title, study detail, status of trial, phase of development, trial location, patient enrollment, study start and end date.
 A detailed analysis of completed and ongoing clinical trials of various exosome therapeutics, based on different parameters, such as trial status, trial registration year, type of sponsor / collaborator, study design, and number of patients enrolled. In addition, the chapter highlights year-wise trend of completed and recruiting trials, age group of the patients enrolled, active industry and non-industry players and location of the trials.
 An in-depth analysis of academic grants that have been awarded to various research institutes for projects related to exosome therapeutics, during the period, 2017-2022, based on several parameters, such as year of grant awarded, amount awarded, type of funding institute center, popular NIH departments, support period, emerging focus area, purpose of grants, grant activity code, local recipients, type of recipient organization study section and type of grant application. Further, the chapter also highlights the popular recipient organizations, (in terms of number of grants and amount awarded).
 A detailed analysis of the global events attended by the exosome therapy developers, based on several relevant parameters, such as year of event, type of event platform, location of event, emerging focus areas, active organizers (in terms of number of events), active industry and non-industry participants, designation of participants, affiliated department of participants, and active speakers (in terms of number of events).
 An analysis of the partnerships that have been established in this domain since 2017, covering instances of research agreement, licensing agreement, manufacturing agreement, product development and commercialization agreement, merger / acquisition, and other relevant deals.
 A detailed analysis of the various investments made since 2017, including grant / award, seed financing, venture capital financing, IPOs, secondary offering, debt financing, other equity, in companies focused on the development of exosome therapeutics.
 An analysis of start-ups / small companies engaged in the development of exosome therapeutics, based on parameters, such as pipeline strength, pipeline maturity, financial support, number of investors, partnership activity and start-up health indexing.
 A case study highlighting the companies engaged in offering exosome development and manufacturing services along with the information on their year of establishment, company size, location of headquarters, types of service(s) offered (isolation, characterization, purification, chromatography, engineering, targeted delivery, diagnostic biomarker, and quality control), method of isolation, method of purification, method of characterization, method of exosome manufacturing (engineering and targeted delivery), scale of operation (discovery / research, pre-clinical, clinical or commercialized) and scalability (small, mid-sized or large).
 An in-depth analysis of exosome therapeutics that failed to progress to later stages of clinical development, based on various relevant parameters, such as trial status of discontinuation, target disease indication(s), route of administration and type of sponsor.

The report also features the likely distribution of the current and forecasted opportunity across important market segments, mentioned below:

 Type of Therapeutic
 Allogeneic Therapy
 AutologousTherapy

 Target Indication(s)
 Degenerative Meniscal Injury
 Dystrophic Epidermolysis Bullosa
 Fistula Perianal
 Retinitis Pigmentosa

 Therapeutic Area
 Dermatological Disorders
 Muscoskeletal Disorders
 Ophthalmic Diseases
 Rectal Disorders


 Route of Administration
 Fistula Tract
 Intra-articular
 Intra-ocular

 Geography
 North America
 Europe
 Asia-Pacific and Rest of the World

Key Questions Answered
 Who are the leading industry and non-industry players engaged in the development of exosome therapies?
 Which are the key drugs being developed across early and late stages of development?
 What are the key agendas being discussed in various global events / conferences related to exosomes?
 What kind of partnership models are commonly adopted by industry stakeholders?
 Which are the leading funding institutes / centers supporting the research related to exosome therapies?
 Which geographies are the most active in conducting clinical trials related to exosome therapies?
 How is the current and future market opportunity, related to exosome therapies likely to be distributed across key market segments?

To view more details on this report, click on the link
https://www.rootsanalysis.com/reports/exosome-therapeutics-market.html

You may also be interested in the following titles:
mRNA Synthesis and Manufacturing Services Market

Lab Automation Market


You may also like to learn what our experts are sharing in Roots educational series:
Long-Acting Drug Delivery: A Novel Pharmacological Strategy to Deliver Therapeutic Modalities

Digital Therapies: The “Digital Pills” of current generation



About Roots Analysis
Roots Analysis is a global leader in the pharma / biotech market research. Having worked with over 750 clients worldwide, including Fortune 500 companies, start-ups, academia, venture capitalists and strategic investors for more than a decade, we offer a highly analytical / data-driven perspective to a network of over 450,000 senior industry stakeholders looking for credible market insights.

Contact:
Ben Johnson
+1 (415) 800 3415
Ben.johnson@rootsanalysis.com


#Exosome Therapeutics Market Trends #Exosome Therapeutics Market Growth #exosometherapies #exosometherapies

Investor Series: Opportunities in Artificial Intelligence in Drug Discovery market Size, Share, Trends by 2035

The new market report titled “Opportunities in the Artificial Intelligence in Drug Discovery Market”, published by Roots Analysis is one of the most sought-after solutions for investors operating in the Artificial Intelligence in Drug Discovery market.

The report will help investors stay updated with the latest market trends and opportunities associated with the Artificial Intelligence in Drug Discovery market. The report comes with a concise summary of the details regarding the historical market data, current market trends, future growth prospects, innovator and product landscape, company health indexing, value proposition analysis, company competitiveness, funding and investment, financial analysis of public ventures, business risk analysis, returns on investment and key acquisition targets, as well as the emerging market trends and opportunities in Artificial Intelligence in Drug Discovery market. The opportunities in the Artificial Intelligence in Drug Discovery market are anticipated to expand significantly.

However, the latest report is mainly intended for business leaders, experts, thought leaders, investors, start-ups and growth stage firms interested in Artificial Intelligence in Drug Discovery business space and is available in the form of PDF and spreadsheet.

Investor Series: Opportunities in the Artificial Intelligence in Drug Discovery Market:
Investor Series Scope and Market Size:
The report provides detailed information on the Artificial Intelligence in Drug Discovery market, covering the core and peripheral Artificial Intelligence in Drug Discovery solutions. It offers a technical and financial perspective on how the Artificial Intelligence in Drug Discovery market opportunities is likely to evolve, in terms of future business success, over the coming decade. The Artificial Intelligence in Drug Discovery market is broadly segmented on the basis of type of solution, type of therapy, therapeutic area and geographical regions. The segmental growth helps the investors, firms, business leaders to get a lucid picture of the niche pockets of growth, as well as the strategies deployed by the market players to drive the growth of these segments. This section of the report helps them understand and determine the core application areas and the differences between the target markets. The report scrutinizes the Artificial Intelligence in Drug Discovery market in terms of market size & volume and significant information pertaining to product bifurcation and Artificial Intelligence in Drug Discovery solutions overview.

Key Market Contenders:
This particular section of the Artificial Intelligence in Drug Discovery market report covers all the necessary details of the Artificial Intelligence in Drug Discovery’ solutions developed by players operating in the Artificial Intelligence in Drug Discovery market. The report goes on to elucidate a quantitative perspective on the relative health of the different innovator companies and an assessment of the various solutions, offered by the companies developing DTx solutions, featuring analysis based on number and types of products, and an informed perspective on the value of the offerings based on multiple relevant aspects.

Information on the funding and investment activity that has taken place in this domain since 2011 has also been included in this report. Moreover, the exhaustive report presents financing category-wise trends, describing the relative maturity of the innovator companies. Further, Artificial Intelligence in Drug Discovery market features a list of the leading Artificial Intelligence in Drug Discovery investors, based on their participation in financing activity in this industry segment. It also covers an elaborate review of the overall Artificial Intelligence in Drug Discovery market from a financial perspective, including detailed fundamental (insights from the balance sheet, and key financial ratios) and technical analyses (insights from historical and recent stock price variations, and analysis using popular stock performance indicators) of financial data of the publicly listed companies.

This section of Artificial Intelligence in Drug Discovery market report focusing on the competitive terrain of the Artificial Intelligence in Drug Discovery market endows the reader with every significant detail and information about the leading competitors on the market. The report provides a key acquisition targets analysis, highlighting some of the promising early-to-mid stage business ventures around which there is likely to be interest for future acquisitions / mergers and also includes the case study of instances where investors have exited various Artificial Intelligence in Drug Discovery related ventures, offering insights on return on investments made. Leveraging the abovementioned details, the report offers an informed opinion on the future outlook for investors in the Artificial Intelligence in Drug Discovery market.

Section covered in Artificial Intelligence in Drug Discovery market report:
Section 01: Need for Artificial Intelligence in Drug Discovery and Innovators Landscape
Section 02: Analysis of Investments
Section 03: Financial Analysis and Assessment of Business Risks
Section 04: Market Forecast and Opportunity Analysis
Section 05: Analysis of Returns on Investment and Key Acquisition Targets

To view more details on this report, click on the link:
https://www.rootsanalysis.com/reports/ai-in-drug-discovery-investor-series.html

You may also be interested in the following titles:
4D Bioprinting Market

Non-Viral / Intracellular Drug Delivery Systems Market


You may also like to learn what our experts are sharing in Roots educational series:
Smart pharmaceutical and healthcare labels: Lets trace medicines from its origin

Introduction To Exosome Therapeutics


About Roots Analysis
Roots Analysis is a global leader in the pharma / biotech market research. Having worked with over 750 clients worldwide, including Fortune 500 companies, start-ups, academia, venture capitalists and strategic investors for more than a decade, we offer a highly analytical / data-driven perspective to a network of over 450,000 senior industry stakeholders looking for credible market insights.

Contact:
Ben Johnson
+1 (415) 800 3415
Ben.johnson@rootsanalysis.com



#ArtificialIntelligenceinDrugDiscoveryInvestorSeries #ArtificialIntelligenceinDrugDiscoveryMarket #AIindrugdiscovery #Artificalintelligenceindrugdiscovery #Artificalintelligenceindrugdiscoveryinvestors

https://newcastlehelix.com/events/2021/11/16/jacobson-lecture-leading-the-fight-against-virus-spread-the-integrated-covid

to Public lectures admin Newcastle University
There is multiple flawed assumption rather than science as to what caused 59,259 deaths in March 2020 that did not follow a Gompertz disease curve and indicative of a mass poisoning event OR Deaths BY Lockdown-missed hospital appointments.
A lecture predicated on the assumption as a virus when other evidence suggest as mass poisoning event, or Deaths BY Lockdown Meddling.
My chart suggests what should be being considered in any relevant lecture other than a one story narrative about a supposed virus.
Indeed it may be a virus but certainly not SARS-Cov2 as none existent composite RNA library sequences.
Chart1

My chart does not include the latest US patent identification of the use of Docetaxel Chemotherapy Immune suppression in one of the nano lipid or the use of Tromethamine in the Jab for age 12-16 to stop the surge in myocarditis pulmonary thrombosis, Cytokine storm and capillary blood clots in most critical organs.
To then have a Cure that does not work and to then cause more of the same symptoms as Cytokine storms and blood clots. What cure kills rather than saves.

Did a Flu2019 vaccine containing Graphene oxide to cause the March2020 disease?
Does a lecture proposing “leading the fight against virus spread address fundamental question

The toxicity of Graphene oxide increases on the exposure of EMF radiation.
Does the correlation of 5G roll out and the new disease March2020s indicate an EMF increase in toxicity of Graphene oxide (resonant frequencies) explain 59,259 death above a 5 year average 2015-2019. ONS data my Chart1.
There is a direct correlation between vaccine roll out jan2021 and 33,016 deaths in Jan2021
A current 37,088 deaths above a five year average since July2021 as indicative of Deaths BY Booster as repeated Graphene Oxide poisoning to result in Cytokine storm and the symptoms as for Graphene oxide poisoning
If those Hypotheses observations become reality then how can anyone take the position that they are “leading the fight against virus spread”.
Where is the consideration of all Hypotheses in real science. Has this proposed lecture replaced science with assumption.
Some would argue pseudo-science assumptions are based on BigPharma finance of medical research. Newcastle University?

What evidence is there to have a lecture predicated on leading the fight against the virus spread if it is not a virus?
If it were a virus then does anyone actually know what that virus RNA sequence is.
How can “Virus spread” be defined by a definition of cases as that is meaningless pseudo-science based on a PCR test that never used any identified offending RNA sequence, compounded by Cycle thresholds at x45, to 35X CT when x15 still guarantees an almost 100% positive.
“Spread of a virus” using a Case predicated on a PCR test that can find anything using the right primers. Zhu China assumed from 22 pathogens it was a Coronavirus and used those primers, while never isolated or identified as linked to any offending RNA sequence.
In effect science where the Results outcome is controlled by the method. A result “primed” to happen. An experiment where the cart comes before the horse.
To then use those flawed cases, using Flawed PCR, lateral flow RNA sequence as the evidence to Shut down the country to stop the supposed spread that then caused Deaths BY Meddling-Lockdown-missed hospital appointments.
That is more fiction than reality as underpinned by flawed science and assumption.
e.g. Where is the correlation between supposed cases and Deaths since June2021

What kind a science that uses supposed cases to have misled the public as a pandemic, shuts down the country that is not killing anyone
Chart2
A Government entirely reliant on supposed “cases” but does not see the “elephant in the room of few deaths, especially a perspective where there are 73,980 respiratory deaths every year 5 year average.
Chart3
A UK Government that can ignore 73,980 respiratory deaths every year, yet shut the country down on 59,259 deaths for an unknown disease that reached herd immunity by June2020.
The rest as Deaths BY Meddling to then discuss “leading the fight against Virus spread” as if that was the only hypothesis.

If the root cause (invented RNA sequence in a PCR x45CT 100% positive, Corman-Drosten fiasco https://cormandrostenreview.com/report/ was flawed then everything thereafter is flawed.
I list below my efforts to try and find in any of the so-called RNA sequence Validation research papers Zhu, CDC WHO that supposedly identified the offending RNA as SARS-Cov2 but reports that actually never did validate.
So a lecture on “leading the fight against the Spread of the virus” becomes meaningless pseudo-science. What Virus? What Spread?

All of which ignores the surge in Myocarditis associated symptoms with possible mass poisoning event in the new disease March2020 and also the Gene Therapy and Boosters mostly as capillary blood clot damage everywhere.
If there is a “Virus“ spread its Myocarditis, and Cytokine storms none of which may have anything to do with a virus and everything to do with a Mass poisoning event.

Chart4 Why a significant increase in Echo Cardiology that doubled 2020-2021 Cytokine Storm poisoning events-capillary damage everywhere?
Apart from lethal Graphene oxide nano lipid delivery system there are U.S. Moderna Patents for Docetaxel nano lipid to inhibit the immune system presumably to allow the Spike 2 proliferation. There is no research that the immune system can turn itself back on.
Docetaxel as a Breast cancer Chemotherapy drug used to turn off the immune system. The question is does that mean turned off for good especially after multiple booster shots as an immune deficient society extinction event?

An add the possibility of an Infertility extinction event due to high concentrations in critical organs.
A Graphene oxide cytotoxicity that causes cell viability reduced to 80% at concentrations of 10µg/ml while a Gene Therapy injection is 1µg/ml as 98% Graphene Oxide active ingredients to then appear in concentrations of 12µg/ml in the ovaries.
Chart5
Yet the one story narrative ignores all that for a viral infection that spreads and ignores even the Pfizer report as to possible biodistribution health impact

Where in the lecture will it address the above hypotheses issues with its own unscientific assertion that it is a virus.
A supposed successful Gene therapy that requires multiple boosters as indicative of efficacy failure, and amendments to U.S. patents to mitigate Myocarditis in the inoculated age 12-17.
A supposed successful Gene therapy that relentlessly has suppressed labelling as Deaths BY Vaccine to be relabelled as Deaths WITH Covid. A pseudo-science that is uncapable of honest data and prefers manipulation. Science then becomes propaganda.
Many vaccine programs have been immediately stopped after 21 days have died, again relabelled as Deaths WITH Covid None are allowed to consider Deaths BY Vaccine.
Table 6
No doubt from the 229,981 there were comorbidities, however many deaths relabelled as Deaths WITH Covid predicated on a flawed PCR-lateral flow composite RNA sequence X35-x45CT magnification as meaningless pseudo-science but it does make the Deaths BY Gene therapy disappear as with all those scientists that do not agree with the one story narrative; sacked Care worker, and NHS staff in April. Doctors removed from Social media yet a lecture on Fighting against the virus spread as OK.
Let us have a lecture on the demise of the NHS due to staff shortages by April or is that privatisation by the backdoor?

So what validity is there in the claim in “Leading the fight against Virus spread that is predicated on meaningless “Cases”?
So what validity is there in the claim in “Leading the fight against Virus spread if it is a mass poisoning event?
So what validity is there in the claim in “Leading the fight against Virus spread when the Vaxxed now realise multiple boosters required as the Vaccine does not stop infection or stops infecting others.

Science is about considering all hypotheses, What science is there, if a lecture starts from the premise that Viruses exist and all other hypotheses is heresy.
Pasteur Germ theory-Béchamp Terrain theory, Exosomes to clean out the poisons, or Exosome as one and the same as a Virus depending on circumstances, or a virus trojan horse high-jacking an Exosome. Hildreth John Hopkins. Now that is real science.
The new disease may indeed be a virus but where is the proof. The only evidence is flawed by Zhu China at failed to isolate, identify or link the disease to the specific offending RNA sequence and also subsequent CDC flawed extraction.
My fully detailed and evidenced evaluation below of those validation reports from Zhu China and CDC.

What evidence is being used to “fight against virus spread” if there is no virus.
What evidence is being used to “fight against virus spread” if there is no evidence that the test used to define “cases” using the PCR test as totally flawed including the Corman Drosten fiasco that uses a library SARS2003 RNA sequence. There is no real SARS-Cov2.
A SARS-Cov2 composite RNA sequence invention that actually does not exist as a virus, or any Koch-Rivers postulate evidence anywhere in those reports.

How can anyone be “leading the fight” against virus spread if the virus was a mass poisoning event based on Graphene Oxide?
Why is there no one “leading the fight” against a mass poisoning event?
How can a Docetaxel Chemotherapy in a Covid Jab stop the virus spread. Surely a chemotherapy designed to inhibit the immune system opens the doors to greater infections if not an extinction event.

What is “the integrated Covid North east Hub” that ignores all alternative views other than the one story narrative of the Chemical industry , and ignores all the alternative analysis?
What cutting edge science threatens all medical researchers with instant dismissal and personal denigration if they disagree with the enforced hypotheses of Covid the Virus.?
Is this Lecture deliberate re-education to cancel all debate? To ignore all debate to make it go away. Head in the Sand science?
Has the Integrate Hub North east considered any other reason for excessive deaths in 2020-2021 other than a virus.
Has Lockdowns missed hospital appointments, toxic agents in the vaccine been the actual cause of supposed virus spread?
What is scientific in a supposed Covid-19 case where no symptoms are labelled a case, where that case uses a PCR test run at 35 to45 cycle threshold based on an RNA sequence that is not identified as causing the disease.
What kind of science is going on at the Integrate Hub North east?

So a list of questions for a lecture compromised by its inability to consider all Hypotheses and as only the one story narrative allowed. That is not science.
Viruses may not exist. What we consider a virus may indeed by an out of control redirected exosome, and more about poisons, and our immune system than anything to do with virus spread.
So how can that be a fight against virus spread if the real science may well be an integrated exosome, quasi-virus or simply poisoning.
Graphene Oxide Mass poisoning may have been the cause, yet a lecture that ignores the alternative hypotheses to suggest and assume; Leading the fight against virus spread: the Integrated Covid Hub North East.

Which question should I put to this lecture?
Maybe the question should be; “Why has this lecture ignored all other evidenced hypotheses?

An evidenced appraisal for Shedding
Shedding
I use 1. the reported autopsy reports as to overwhelming spike2 proteins as a pathogen cause of death not the disease, then 2. the Shedding of that inundation from Adverse reactions material from AFLD.

1. Evidence that the Spike 2 protein does inundate the body to a level to allow excretion by skin contact and breathing.
Ground-breaking autopsy report shows the vaccinated had toxic spike proteins all over the body
https://covidcalltohumanity.org/2021/08/18/ground-breaking-autopsy-report-shows-the-vaccinated-had-toxic-spike-proteins-all-over-the-body/
Vaccinated Person Autopsy: Spike Protein As Possible Cause Of Death
https://thetruedefender.com/vaccinated-person-autopsy-spike-protein-as-possible-cause-of-death/

From that evidence of Spike2, or Graphene Oxide, or EMF GO irradiation inundation to then prove it excretes, transmits to others in contact.
Whatever it is that is being shed/transmitted, Graphene Oxide, Spike2 protein or EMF irradiation from the Graphene Oxide it manages to “infect” unVaxxed or replicate Covid symptoms usually in the same household. “Infect” could be “poisoned”
The most significant evidence of passing the “disease” form “Vaxxed” to Unvaxxed relatives is the Vaccine Adverse Reactions Reporting System used by America First Line Doctors on “Shedding” issues.

2. America’s Frontline Doctors: COVID-vaccinated can ‘shed’ spike protein, harming unvaccinated May2021
• pass through the “blood-brain barrier” causing neurological damage,
• be “shed” by the vaccinated, bringing about sickness in unvaccinated children and adults, and
• cause irregular vaginal bleeding in women.
Third, as these experimental vaccines produce many trillions of spike proteins in their recipients, these vaccinated individuals “can shed some of these (spike protein) particles to close contacts,” causing disease in them.
In an email correspondence with LifeSiteNews, Dr. Simone Gold, the founder of AFLDS, directed this writer to an April 29 tweet where she posted a document from Pfizer’s experimental trials in which the pharmaceutical giant “acknowledges this mechanism” of potential shedding, she wrote.
As the document states, one can be “exposed to [the] study intervention due to environmental exposure,” including “by inhalation or skin contact” with someone involved in the study, or with another who has been exposed in the same way.
And this, according to AFLDS, can be dangerous. As the issues brief continues, “the spike proteins are pathogenic (‘disease causing’) just like the full virus.” Furthermore, these “spike proteins bind more tightly than the fully intact virus” and thus cases around the world of “pericarditis, shingles, pneumonia, blood clots in the extremities and brain, Bell’s Palsy, vaginal bleeding and miscarriages have been reported in persons who are near persons who have been vaccinated.” (VAERS JB) Such shedding also “appears to be causing wide variety of autoimmune disease (where the body attacks its own tissue) in some persons.”
In addition, other more serious dangers to even the unvaccinated are possible due to the fact that these “spike proteins can cross the blood brain barrier, unlike traditional vaccines.”
https://masklaw.ca/articles/2021/05/13/americas-frontline-doctors-covid-vaccinated-can-shed-spike-protein-harming

The added comment is that the shedding itself causes a wide variety of Auto-immune viral disease or as non-viral exosome immune response to toxins aswell as the extreme Cytokine storm capillary blood clots as in Covid, and in the Gene Therapy, or is that Graphene Oxide Cytokine Storm, or EMF irradiation from the Graphene Oxide quasi EMF as exactly the same excessive autoimmune response Cytokine storms.
There are multiple pathways to a definition as to what is going on. No one actually knows unless you work at CDC, or Downing St who will have you all believe it is SARS-Cov2 which actually does not exist whatsoever.

However that AFLD article from May2021 has now been superceded by the La Quinta research and independent peer group confirmation analysis of 98% of the Gene therapy as Graphene oxide (undisclosed by BigPharma).
Also corroborated by their electron microscopes, and fluorescence micro spectrometry at 270Nm as Graphene Oxide.
My ongoing theory was Spike2 replication was so unconstrained replication that it excrete from the skin cells and every orifice, however the Graphene Oxide toxin suggests it is that toxin that is on the skin rather than Spike2 inundation.

The Pfizer report https://media.tghn.org/medialibrary/2020/11/C4591001_Clinical_Protocol_Nov2020_Pfizer_BioNTech.pdf'>https://media.tghn.org/medialibrary/2020/11/C4591001_Clinical_Protocol_Nov2020_Pfizer_BioNTech.pdf requested participants to report all exposure (shedding) events
PF-07302048 (BNT162 RNA-Based COVID-19 Vaccines) Protocol C4591001 page67-69
8.3.5. Exposure During Pregnancy or Breastfeeding, and Occupational Exposure
Exposure to the study intervention under study during pregnancy or breastfeeding and occupational exposure are reportable to Pfizer Safety within 24 hours of investigator awareness.
8.3.5.1. Exposure During Pregnancy EDP
An EDP occurs if:
• A female participant is found to be pregnant while receiving or after discontinuing study intervention.
• A male participant who is receiving or has discontinued study intervention exposes a female partner prior to or around the time of conception.
• A female is found to be pregnant while being exposed or having been exposed to study intervention due to environmental exposure. Below are examples of environmental exposure during pregnancy:
• A female family member or healthcare provider reports that she is pregnant after having been exposed to the study intervention by inhalation or skin contact.
• A male family member or healthcare provider who has been exposed to the study intervention by inhalation or skin contact then exposes his female partner prior to or around the time of conception.
8.3.5.2. Exposure During Breastfeeding
An exposure during breastfeeding occurs if:
• A female participant is found to be breastfeeding while receiving or after discontinuing study intervention.
• A female is found to be breastfeeding while being exposed or having been exposed to study intervention (ie, environmental exposure). An example of environmental exposure during breastfeeding is a female family member or healthcare provider who reports that she is breastfeeding after having been exposed to the study intervention by inhalation or skin contact.
8.3.5.3. Occupational Exposure
An occupational exposure occurs when a person receives unplanned direct contact with the study intervention, which may or may not lead to the occurrence of an AE (Adverse Event. Untoward medical occurrence). Such persons may include healthcare providers, family members, and other roles that are involved in the trial participant’s care.

The remit of that Pfizer report disputes any argument from the very same people and factchecker Pharma employees that shedding does not exist.
A Phase 1/2/3, Placebo-Controlled, Randomized, Observer-Blind, Dose-Finding Study To Evaluate The Safety, Tolerability, Immunogenicity, And Efficacy Of Sars-Cov-2 RNA Vaccine Candidates Against Covid-19 In Healthy Individuals
A dose finding study that found from their Guineapig Pig experiment on the whole world as Graphene Oxide as too strong, A Spike3 protein that distributes everywhere not restricted to the arm muscle, and does not self-terminate replication to inundate the autoimmune system to create Cytokine storm either by the Spike2 protein, or by the Graphene Oxide, aided and abetted by harmonic resonance from external EMF radiation 5G,Routers. Masts? as increased toxicity.

Well before the Gene Therapy, the John Hopkins feasibility report (below) considered Self-Amplifying mRNA Vaccines SAM, and Self spreading vaccines.
It was the invention from SinoPEG of the nano-lipid coating delivery system to allow the fragile RNA messenger to enter the blood stream when this was eventually achieved.
That SinoPEG nano-lipid technology now allows a number of incurable diseases to be reassessed using RNA delivery messenger system rehabilitation, especially Cancers ad HIV. The only problem is the protective coating encapsulation using highly toxic Graphene Oxide kills people.
The research is now on to find a different encapsulation, or as ongoing to see how much Graphene oxide the world human Guinea pigs can be poisoned before they “keel over”, or somehow to detoxify the Graphene Oxide.
The Chinese company SinoPEG uses PolyEthylene Glycol to dissolve the Graphene Oxide. Both also as toxic adjuvants and to enhance blood stream transfer.
A wondrous technology or an irreversible infertility Pandoras Box?

Either as the Spike2 protein or the Graphene Oxide inundation, there is shedding to non-injected as a Self-spreader or in this case a Self-amplifying Self spreader. A technology available in 2018 in a feasibility report from John Hopkins Uni and also in the Flu 2019 vaccine to have also used Graphene Oxide as a mass poisoning event that may explain most accelerated All Causes of Deaths extra to a 5 year average death surges for March2020 59259 excess deaths, vaccine roll out Jan2021, 33,016 excess deaths and ongoing booster poisonings interseason2021 37,088 excess deaths surge that all involved Cytokine storm auto-immune over-reaction to toxins. Either as the Spike2 protein, the Graphene Oxide, or both, exacerbated by EMF frequencies resonant to increase the toxicity of Graphene oxide.
Will; our conversation; EMF Toxicity process? GO has an ability to “convert” incoming EMF lower frequencies to more powerful higher frequencies hence increased toxicity as toxicity self-enhancement? Research paper evidence required on that phenomena.
Chart1
Back in 2018 there was already the reality of synthetic mRNA Gene therapy considered in Technologies to Address Global Catastrophic Biological Risks from John Ho[kins University
PDF Page8; Self-Amplifying mRNA Vaccines SAM:
SAM vaccines use the genome of a modified virus with positive sense RNA, which is recognizable to our human translational machinery. Once delivered inside a human cell, the SAM is translated and creates 2 proteins: an antigen of interest to stimulate an immune response, and a viral replicase for intracellular amplification of the vaccine. The ability of SAM to self-replicate results in a stronger, broader, and more effective humoral and cellular immune response than some other vaccines.”

However on the same page;
Self-Spreading Vaccines: Self-spreading vaccines are genetically engineered to move through populations like communicable diseases, but rather than causing disease, they confer protection.
The vision is that a small number of individuals in a target population could be vaccinated, and the vaccine strain would then circulate in the population much like a pathogenic virus, resulting in rapid, widespread immunity.

https://jhsphcenterforhealthsecurity.s3.amazonaws.com/181009-gcbr-tech-report.pdf
https://www.centerforhealthsecurity.org/news/center-news/2018/2018-10-09_technology-global-catastrophic-biological-risks.html

What is the difference in definition between “Shedding” and “Self-spreading”?
By accident or deliberate? Al the same that is what a Covid injection can do by Spike2 inundation to excrete by skin contact, or breathing to contaminate others and Pfizer Does finding study above, and CDC VAERS reports that confirm shedding issues.

Detection of Measles Virus RNA in Urine Specimens from Vaccine Recipients
“For the study, daily urine samples were obtained from either 15-month-old children or young adults following measles immunization. Overall, measles virus RNA was detectedin 10 of 12 children during the 2-week sampling period.”
https://journals.asm.org/doi/epdf/10.1128/jcm.33.9.2485-2488.1995
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/7494055/

Pfizer document confirms ‘Covid Vaccine Shedding’ leading to ‘Menstrual Cycle Disruption’ and ‘Miscarriage’ is possible via ‘skin-to-skin contact’ and ‘breathing the same air’
https://media.tghn.org/medialibrary/2020/11/C4591001_Clinical_Protocol_Nov2020_Pfizer_BioNTech.pdf'>https://media.tghn.org/medialibrary/2020/11/C4591001_Clinical_Protocol_Nov2020_Pfizer_BioNTech.pdf
From the Trenches World Report;
https://fromthetrenchesworldreport.com/stay-away-from-the-vaxxed-it-is-official-from-pfizers-own-documents/285636
Greatreject; Stay away from the vaccinated – It’s official
https://greatreject.org/covid-mrna-vaccine-proteine-spiking-shedding/

However as independent but corroborative from;
https://eraoflight.com/2021/05/01/were-covid-19-vaccines-made-to-self-spread-to-non-vaccinated-people/

Johns Hopkins University confirms that “self-spreading” vaccines are real May2021
https://thetattyjournal.org/2021/05/08/johns-hopkins-university-confirms-that-self-spreading-vaccines-are-real/

Self-Spreading Vaccines Are No Myth...It's Hard Science Johns Hopkins Confirmed Them - Covid Genocide Is Here
https://rense.com/general96/self-spreading-vaccines.php

Links on Graphene Oxide issues;
https://jdfor2024.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/AppendixGrapheneOxide.pdf

corroborative peer group confirmation
American Scientists Confirm Toxic Graphene Oxide, and More, in Covid Injections
“Graphene oxide is cytotoxic, genotoxic, and magneticotoxic”
Dr. Young’s published scientific paper, Scanning & Transmission Electron Microscopy Reveals Graphene Oxide in CoV-19 Vaccines, can be read by following this LINK https://www.drrobertyoung.com/post/transmission-electron-microscopy-reveals-graphene-oxide-in-cov-19-vaccines
or in the pdf document as attached: https://dailyexpose.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/Robert-Young-GrapheneOxideVaccinePaperUpdated.pdf
https://rightsfreedoms.wordpress.com/2021/09/02/american-scientists-confirm-toxic-graphene-oxide-and-more-in-covid-injections/
Table1 Gene Therapy Ingredients

The damage as significant concentrations of the Gene Therapy nano-lipids in critical organs
Leaked Pfizer Biodistribution report
https://www.naturalnews.com/files/Pfizer-bio-distribution-confidential-document-translated-to-english.pdf